The WBA continues to prove itself the most inconsistent sanctioning body in the sport of boxing as a prior press release the organization itself released apparently did not reflect the actual opinion of its president, Gilberto Mendoza. The article concerned the controversy stemmed from Gervonta Davis’ March 1st bout against Lamont Roach Jr. which saw a legitimate knockdown discounted by the referee. Their title bout eventually culminated in a majority decision (MD) draw, but would have seen Roach win on the scorecards had the knockdown been counted.

Following what was likely social media backlash and extra attention surrounding said press release, the article has now been scrubbed from the internet entirely in a clear bid by Mendoza to distance himself from what had previously been stated by writer Jesus Cova.

“From our perspective, Willis’ decision was not unreasonable or unjustifiable,” The WBA’s press release had stated previously.

“He ruled in real-time that Davis had not been struck by a punch before going down, and therefore, no knockdown should be recorded. Judges, by regulation, must follow the referee’s rulings—they do not have the authority to override his decisions on knockdowns.

“Some skeptics have suggested that Willis’ call benefited Davis unfairly, but we do not subscribe to that notion. In our long experience judging fights, we see no evidence of favoritism—only a referee prioritizing the physical safety of a fighter who appeared compromised by an eye injury.“

In response to a reporter who referenced the now-deleted article and questioned the nature of the press release, which had been written as if it held the perspective from the entire organization, Gilberto Mendoza would clarify the article was entirely Cova’s own opinion rather than that of the WBA.

“Please stop misconstructing this situation. It’s his [Jesus Cova’s] perspective or opinion on the situation,” Mendoza replied on social media.

“If I as president of the [WBA] advised by the officials international committee, knowing the competition rules, and in attendance say it was a knockdown. Why we keep talking about a wrong article in the website? It was remove from the site. Hope it’s clear.“

The removal of the article does not fully absolve Gilberto Mendoza of any blame, however, given it had been up long enough for him to make the needed corrections as the president of the WBA that owns the website. Instead, the press release’s deletion could have been prompted by the widespread controversy that spilled out from the article and could merely be an attempt by Mendoza to wash his hands off the questionable support for the decision to discount the knockdown that Davis suffered.

Notably, the WBA is arguably well-known for its favoritism towards fighters aligned with Premier Boxing Champions (PBC) ― with who Gervonta Davis (30-0-1, 28 KO’s) is signed. This is further reflected through the fact Davis has been closely linked to the WBA since he campaigned at super featherweight (130 lbs), with several situations pinpointing their interests being closely aligned with the fighter:

1. The availability of the WBA “super” title for Gervonta Davis when he faced Jesus Cuellar in 2018 to become the WBA “super” 130-pound champion. Normally, a vacant WBA title is simply regarded as a world title without the “regular” and “super” distinctions.
   
   Furthermore, a WBA “super” belt usually emerges when an already existing champion is elevated to the position, with the WBA “regular” distinction then being introduced in turn. There are few known scenarios of any fighter outright winning a WBA “super” title unless they face a champion with in grasp of such a belt, as it is only made available for reputable fighters who have earned such a distinction. Davis winning it as a vacant title is therefore indicative of favoritism rather than protocol.
   
2. When Davis moved up to lightweight (135 lbs), the first world title he challenged for was a WBA title. Though this appears innocuous, as other sanctioning bodies similarly give fighters that move between divisions an opportunity to fight for their titles if they held it before, it is nonetheless a prevalent connection as Vasyl Lomachenko (18-3, 12 KO’s) had been a WBA “super” world champion at the time. This move by the WBA seemed to be a clear intent to see Davis get into the position to become a WBA “regular” champion in line with their interests to promote the fighter.
   
3. Last year, the WBA had sought to enforce a weight rehydration rule when Gervonta Davis was set to face Frank Martin. After backlash against the sudden decision, one where Davis himself seemed affronted by the WBA’s move ― despite having been set to benefit from it, the WBA would rescind the rule and no mention has been made of any rehydration clause ever since.
   
4. In an unprecedented move, Davis defended his own WBA 135-pound title in a match against Leo Santa Cruz while simultaneously being allowed to fight for Cruz’ WBA 130-pound title. This is extremely odd, given the two engaged at super featherweight, set at the 130 lbs limit. This would bar either fighter from fighting for a title set at a higher weight class, yet Davis’ WBA lightweight belt was still officially made available and retained after his win over Cruz. Davis also won Cruz’ WBA title.
   
   In boxing, the rules sanctioning bodies ― including the WBA ― clearly bars any fighter from fighting for a title other than their current division. Thus far, no one has questioned the circumstances where two titles from two different weight classes were made available, allowing the WBA’s role in this to go completely unnoticed.

In essence, Gilberto Mendoza could simply be attempting to diffuse any criticism by putting the blame on author Jesus Cova and maintaining that he was actually in support of the knockdown by counted. This is made so more obvious by his attempts to push for a rematch rather than a reversal of the result.

Reversing the MD draw between Gervonta Davis and Lamont Roach Jr. (25-1-2, 10 KO’s) would have to be a decision that the WBA would first support if it was Mendoza’s believe that the knockdown Davis suffered was legitimate. If the knockdown is counted, Roach would be handed a win and become the new WBA lighweight champion.

However, based on the WBA’s aforementioned connections Gervonta with Davis, supporting a rematch would prevent Davis from losing his title outright, despite the better resolution being for the draw to be overturned. Had the WBA maintained its stance of not considering the knockdown legitimate, their current stance on a rematch would be understandable, but with the organization claiming the knockdown should have counted it acknowledges that one occurred and should have been reflected through the scorecards.

As such, it is probable that Mendoza supported the original stance of the WBA as implicated by writer Jesus Nova but is only backtracking after receiving criticism for said stance.

All in all, while the WBA’s shift is not a surprise, it highlights yet another case where the organization has proven itself to be inconsistent with its decision-making, which continues to highlight the danger the sanctioning body poses to the integrity of the sport of boxing.